Numbers drive Media and Marketing today. People don’t like it, but the “numbers” people usually control budgets, so numbers are endured as a necessary evil.
Professionals work through their excel sheets, make some graphs (usually too many) and try their best to back up their ideas with “hard data.” Then, they hope, they can get back to doing the creative thinking that was the reason for choosing their profession in the first place.
In 1998, McKinsey & Co declared the “War for Talent.” They didn’t do so lightly. Their study spanned an entire year, involved scores of companies, thousands of people and had a specific conclusion: In the “new economy” the key to success is to attract and retain the best talent. Their findings were logical, widely accepted and most likely wrong.
TV is the King of Media. Nobody has the scale, the advertiser loyalty or the massive coverage of TV stations. Consequently, nobody has as much to lose as TV. However, they seem powerless to stop the onward digital march. Most successful TV players seem to shrink from the digital challenge. There have been initiatives, but few successes.
From Susan Boyle to the Iranian election, online Social Media has had an enormous effect on society. Web driven Social Networks can make Gods out of mortals; influence world leaders and slay mighty brands with startling speed.
Moreover, this all seems to happen unpredictably, almost violently as if an entire placid lake immediately erupts into an enormous geyser, irregularly but repeatedly.
What makes Social Media so different from anything we’ve seen before? The answer is Chaos.
In the Digital Marketing arena today, clients have two options: small specialist agencies or full service agencies that can provide a holistic, integrated solution. Ironically, after three decades of spinning off specialist divisions it is the big network agencies that now seem to prefer the full service strategy.
It is a confusing situation for both clients and agencies alike and the uncertainty creates an environment where incompetents and charlatans thrive. (I am amazed at all of the “social media experts” who claim to have 10 years of experience in the field). However, by understanding the basic underlying forces at work a lot of the confusion can be cleared up.
The concept that advertising affects the brain is almost tautological. Its very purpose is to influence how we think and feel. However, in the past the issue has been addressed mostly by way of folk wisdom with very little evidence or real understanding. Fairly recent developments in neurology are beginning to change that.
Radio is the ugly stepchild of the media world. Once the herald of a new electronic age, it now fights for market share with the also lowly billboards. Planners relegate Radio to “support media for TV” status.
If Rodney Dangerfield sold media, it would certainly be Radio. However, many of the smartest business people today are in Radio and the medium regularly outperforms its peers in profitability. There is much Digital Media can learn.
